Avotius
Some guy
I have finally decided my next camera will be a X-Pro1 or a X-E1.
I do have a few questions for the Fuji users here that I would appreciate any info you could share from your experiences.
How is the dust removal function on the Fuji cameras? Dust is the bane of my existence on Canon DSLR's, but on my near to death Oly EP1 it is the only thing that still works right and Oly really nailed it on their implementation IMO.
Focus peaking is coming so I hear. How is using adapted lenses as of now though? I assume it is much the same as with the Olympus cameras where you just enlarge and focus if you need to. Do we know yet how focus peaking will be implemented? Any demo videos? This is important to me because at first I will only have enough dough for a body and will have to rely on adapted lenses for a while which brings me to....
How are the Zeiss ZM lenses doing on these bodies? I have a 50 f2 and a 21 f2.8. I hear there are problems with the Biogons because of their deep rear elements. Does anyone here use a similar setup and would care to share any thoughts? I would probably be using these two ZM lenses most often, especially the 21, the rest of my lenses are all old 50mm SLR lenses so probably not as troublesome. Would it be better for me to get a cheap old wide angle SLR lens to use on the camera until I can get a Fuji lens?
I am leaning more to the X-Pro1 and in the future picking up the Fuji 35mm lens as my go to carry around kit, but it may be a while before I can save for the Fuji lens. Would I be essentially wasting that optical viewfinder or is there some use for it with adapted lenses?
Thanks for any thoughts you guys might have about my questions! I really do appreciate it. Took me way too long to finally decide to go with a Fuji over an OMD or Nex 6/7.
I do have a few questions for the Fuji users here that I would appreciate any info you could share from your experiences.
How is the dust removal function on the Fuji cameras? Dust is the bane of my existence on Canon DSLR's, but on my near to death Oly EP1 it is the only thing that still works right and Oly really nailed it on their implementation IMO.
Focus peaking is coming so I hear. How is using adapted lenses as of now though? I assume it is much the same as with the Olympus cameras where you just enlarge and focus if you need to. Do we know yet how focus peaking will be implemented? Any demo videos? This is important to me because at first I will only have enough dough for a body and will have to rely on adapted lenses for a while which brings me to....
How are the Zeiss ZM lenses doing on these bodies? I have a 50 f2 and a 21 f2.8. I hear there are problems with the Biogons because of their deep rear elements. Does anyone here use a similar setup and would care to share any thoughts? I would probably be using these two ZM lenses most often, especially the 21, the rest of my lenses are all old 50mm SLR lenses so probably not as troublesome. Would it be better for me to get a cheap old wide angle SLR lens to use on the camera until I can get a Fuji lens?
I am leaning more to the X-Pro1 and in the future picking up the Fuji 35mm lens as my go to carry around kit, but it may be a while before I can save for the Fuji lens. Would I be essentially wasting that optical viewfinder or is there some use for it with adapted lenses?
Thanks for any thoughts you guys might have about my questions! I really do appreciate it. Took me way too long to finally decide to go with a Fuji over an OMD or Nex 6/7.
hkleinespel
Member
I you want to use adapted lenses, I would go for the X-E1. Better EVF, and the OVF is useless for focusing on adapted lenses (it's OK if you scale focus). And I think it's better to invest in lenses rather than bodies... The IQ is the same on the X-E1 and Pro1... (and the X-E1 is smaller...this and the lower price were the two main reasons why I chose the X-E1)
Dust cleaning : no idea. I don't see any spots on my images but the camera is quite new and I don't change lenses so I can't really tell... All I can tell you is that you can choose between automatic dust cleaning (when you turn it on, or off, or maybe even both) and manual.
The Focus Peaking is coming with a July 23rd firmware update, so if you really want some more details about this, I would just wait until then. Comments about the functionnality will quickly be available on the internet.
Dust cleaning : no idea. I don't see any spots on my images but the camera is quite new and I don't change lenses so I can't really tell... All I can tell you is that you can choose between automatic dust cleaning (when you turn it on, or off, or maybe even both) and manual.
The Focus Peaking is coming with a July 23rd firmware update, so if you really want some more details about this, I would just wait until then. Comments about the functionnality will quickly be available on the internet.
YYV_146
Well-known
The 18mm zm has some blurring in the extreme edges. i don't shoot scenery with the setup, but it is fine for street work. A symmetric design may be worse, though...
The planar is going to be awesome on the X-E1, nice, sharp colors.
Currently, using legacy lenses is a bit difficult - you will have to judge focus by zooming in, and without visual aid you can miss very easily at f2. But I suppose peaking is meant to fix that. Right now I'm going slow, either scale focusing with the 18 or shooting things I can take time to focus on.
The planar is going to be awesome on the X-E1, nice, sharp colors.
Currently, using legacy lenses is a bit difficult - you will have to judge focus by zooming in, and without visual aid you can miss very easily at f2. But I suppose peaking is meant to fix that. Right now I'm going slow, either scale focusing with the 18 or shooting things I can take time to focus on.
gavinlg
Veteran
Colin, I would advise staying with the x-pro1 - the OVF is really nice and one of the best things about the camera system. Scale focussing the wide adapted M lenses means you can use the optical finder with a custom frame line tailored for that focal length - which is really nice. Not sure if you know, but the OVF has 2 switchable magnifications and so is comfortable to use with 14mm up to about 75mm lenses.
The body of the x-pro1 is the same size and feel as a leica M which is ergonomically perfect, however it is quite a bit lighter. The xe-1 by comparison is smaller again.
Focus peaking is coming this month in a FW update. You will love the fuji lenses (once you get them) - Id go as far as saying I think they are optically nicer than the zuiko m4/3 lenses.
The dust filter is excellent - no dust problems at all.
Hope this helps - any other questions just ask.
Gavin
The body of the x-pro1 is the same size and feel as a leica M which is ergonomically perfect, however it is quite a bit lighter. The xe-1 by comparison is smaller again.
Focus peaking is coming this month in a FW update. You will love the fuji lenses (once you get them) - Id go as far as saying I think they are optically nicer than the zuiko m4/3 lenses.
The dust filter is excellent - no dust problems at all.
Hope this helps - any other questions just ask.
Gavin
stompyq
Well-known
Personally I think using adapted lenses with the current implementation of the Fuji X series is not very advantageous. Everyones expectations are different, but I felt that any lens wider than 35mm looked terrible at the corners with the Fuji. Having seen the type of work you do I think it'll end up bugging you. The 50mm lenses are all good but with the crop factor that makes them 75mm FOV. Hardly a general purpose lens.
If your going down this road then I would stick with the Fuji lenses. Get the 35mm and maybe the 18-55mm zoom (at 18mm its outstanding and optically better than the prime). Use the adapted lenses as secondary. You'll enjoy the cameras longer and be less frustrated.
If your going down this road then I would stick with the Fuji lenses. Get the 35mm and maybe the 18-55mm zoom (at 18mm its outstanding and optically better than the prime). Use the adapted lenses as secondary. You'll enjoy the cameras longer and be less frustrated.
stompyq
Well-known
Oh and I used to own a Fuji XE-1 that I got rid of for financial reasons. The Dust reduction system was excellent. The camera build is smaller and I felt the feel of the larger X-pro1 was more balanced than my XE-1. However I never used the OVF with my X100 and was happy with the EVF of the XE-1
willie_901
Veteran
Dust removal works well. I have not had a dust issue. However I do not spend much time in dusty environments and I rarely use apertures smaller than f 11. I have cleaning set for turn on and turn off.
The bodies are not sealed so I imagine if you spend time in were there's a lot of airborne dust, it could be an issue.
On other forums (DP Review excepted) there are rarely complaints about dust.
porktaco
Well-known
if you're using the camera as a digital back for legacy lenses, the choice is the xe-1. why, you ask. well, i'm glad you asked. as noted above the OVF/EVF issues favor the xe-1, but the most important thing is MF focus assist. on the xe-1, it's a simple click of the thumbwheel for a 3x or 10x zoom. it's astonishingly easy. i think the x-pro requires more fiddling to do this.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
So if I may ask, what won you over to prefer the Fuji X compared to the NEX 6 if adapted RF lenses is your primary interest?
G
f16sunshine
Moderator
Actually it's the same method to activate magnification on the xpro1.
I understand the advantage of the XE1 is the EVF has better resolution.
For me I like the larger Xpro1 size and the OVF does work great while scale focussing and with native lenses.
That said, I do not enjoy using adapted lenses on the xpro1 at this point. Focus peaking may help.. we shall see.
I prefer to use my 5Dii for reflex lenses and am currently looking for another digital M for RF lenses.
The true beauty of the X-series is the native lenses on that fabulous Xtrans sensor.
I thought I would be using my old RF lenses more but honestly the Fuji lenses are higher IQ on the sensor, lighter weigh, and faster to focus. Faster than I have ever been with a larger aperture lens on an RF camera.
Avotius
Some guy
Well even though I think that thr Sony implementation of focus peaking is the best of the bunch (red medium is great) using adapted lenses is only a part of my plan. At first more so but later I will probably stick to one camera one lens as I have in the past and get the ultrawide when it comes out as that is 99% of my personal work having used an Oly EP1 and the pana 20 and 7-14 lenses. I would have gone OMD but I still have that annoying feeling that I am a step behind everything when I use m43. Also I know that Sony has some decent lenses but in my opinion the range is not on par with Fuji, especially with Zeiss lenses (my catnip) now available to play with on Fuji as well. Xpro1 and a Zeiss 32 would make a near perfect one lens one camera kit for me, as long as there is sufficient Zeissness to that lens.
Fnally a stupid but important for me point, I shoot a lot of professional stuff. Having a Fuji is better "face" than a Sony or tiny Olympus if you show up to a shoot with tiny looking cameras it is bad for your image, especially here. Sure right tool for the job and all but not here, clients are too vain to understand why a 7mm ultrawide on a tiny OMD is better than a 17mm on a 5d mk2 and will not use you if they think your equiptment is too "common", maybe a bit hard to understand but it is a factor here when dealing with people. When I go out to a social business event I am not going in there with a Canon hung around neck. There has to be something unique to show off, vain as that may sound.
willie_901
Veteran
It does not sound vain to me. Instead it sounds practical.
It's true that clients generally expect pros to use what they perceive to be pro gear. Of course some clients could care less what you use. I was surprised the first time a client told me their clients felt important because of the equipment I used. This doesn't mean you can produce low-quality work and displaying pro-looking gear will make everything ok. But there is a show business aspect to gigs I never anticipated.
I was at a family event with my X-Pro 1 and someone said, "Oh look, he brought his expensive camera." I think the rectangular hoods are good marketing.
It's true that clients generally expect pros to use what they perceive to be pro gear. Of course some clients could care less what you use. I was surprised the first time a client told me their clients felt important because of the equipment I used. This doesn't mean you can produce low-quality work and displaying pro-looking gear will make everything ok. But there is a show business aspect to gigs I never anticipated.
I was at a family event with my X-Pro 1 and someone said, "Oh look, he brought his expensive camera." I think the rectangular hoods are good marketing.
I have an X-E1 and no Fuji lenses...just adapted Contax/Yashica Zeiss, although I'm planning on getting the 27mm pancake when it's released. I've owned the NEX7 previously and still own a NEX5 which I use strictly for studio shots. The C/Y lenses of course work on both.
Focus peaking is cool, but it's not foolproof. Hopefully the Fuji implementation will be better than Sony...oftentimes the peaking will indicate focus, but magnification shows otherwise. I run into this almost daily with the 5...peaking gets you close but magnfication is required to actually nail it.
As far as native lenses, there is no comparison between Sony and Fuji.
Focus peaking is cool, but it's not foolproof. Hopefully the Fuji implementation will be better than Sony...oftentimes the peaking will indicate focus, but magnification shows otherwise. I run into this almost daily with the 5...peaking gets you close but magnfication is required to actually nail it.
As far as native lenses, there is no comparison between Sony and Fuji.
user237428934
User deletion pending
Compared to a standard P&S this IS an expensive camera.
btgc
Veteran
It is funny and sad at the time. If they are so knowledgeable why they just don't do the job? In fact, some clients try to make smart remarks and tell what's right and what's not. There's very faint border between clients wishes and being smartass. But then they have money we want to take from them.
Probably there's market for empty display kits which one carry in a bag and show occasionally to fit into right scheme of customer's world and use other gear for actual work where it doesn't involve facing camera at client
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Hey Colin! I think you will like the Fujis. Save up for the native glass if you can but any adapted lenses from 35mm on up should render nicely. I've divested myself of my rangefinder gear, but plan to use OM lenses on the X-E1, especially once the Metabones speed booster comes out. (They are fine with a normal adapter as well.)
hkleinespel
Member
I really wouldn't go for the Fuji X Zeiss glass... expensive and not better than the fantastic Fuji lenses... They should have made lenses that were really different from what Fuji's offering, like a 10mm, or a 85 1.4 ...
f16sunshine
Moderator
Yeah I agree with this lens comment.
Zeiss mad interesting choices in their lens offerings for this system.
The Fuji lenses are tough contenders at the low prices especially.
The 35mm Fuji is such a killer lens!
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
It is really great.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I was a working pro for a few years recently (2007 to 2011). I used whatever camera was best to do the job with. Perhaps it's a different culture, perhaps it's how I sold myself and my business, but I never had a client ask me what camera I was going to use or comment about my gear in any way. All my clients cared about was
a) did I get there on time,
b) did I do the work,
c) were they happy with the results, and
d) if there*was some way that they could pay me less.
I shot jobs (commissioned landscape, tabletop product, editorial portraits, events, and other stuff) with everything from a pro-grade DSLR to a point and shoot. Some of my biggest sales were shot with a Panasonic FZ10 ultrazoom point and shoot. (The one I recall best was a 10 picture spread in Red Bulletin, an Austrian sports mag published by Red Bull.)
Never made a difference what camera I used, to my clients, if the images were up to snuff. They wouldn't have paid me if they weren't. I always got paid. ;-)
G